Bavarian vines

[joerookery]

I'm about to unveil another article. This one is on M15 steel helmet plates. This continuation of research done in the 1980s has been extremely interesting. Considering I have zero M15 enlisted helmets, it has also been an educational experience. Before I give any conclusions at all I will pose an interesting dilemma of references. In 1915 what were the differences in Bavarian helmet plates for enlisted soldiers?

The standard work on Bavaria by Seibold has some answers however, there seems to be some differences in Turinetti and in the old Kaiserzeit magazine. Was there a difference between mounted and foot Wappen in 1915? What was that Wappen difference?

Here is the primary issue -- size of the Wappen and vines between the legs. John O'Connor has allowed the reproduction of these drawings to illustrate what I'm talking about.

When did a difference end? What are your thoughts?

 

[Tony without Kaiser]

Without repeating too much of what I wrote here, the vines were removed for foot Mannschaften in 1886, and then for everyone in 1914.

I have never see an steel M15 Wappen with vines. As far as I know, this only applied to gilt or silver Wappen.

Here is a Model 1915 Bayern (Bavarian) Mannschaften (Other Ranks) mounted-troops Pickelhaube. No vines. However, if I recall, (I am at work) (ya ya I know I should be working blah blah blah) if I recall, the mounted Wappen is wider than the Foot troops Wappen.

If fact, I think it is identical to my Model 1896/1914 Bayern (Bavaria)
Field Artillery Regt 7 Wappen. 1914= no vines.

M15 Foot Troops to compare, note how close the lions are to the shield:

 

[joerookery]

if I recall, the mounted Wappen is wider than the Foot troops Wappen.

There are tremendous advantages to asking advance collectors especially those with large collections! Tony I think you hit a key point on the head. I do not think it is vines but rather the size that matters. 20 February 1914 -- well before the war -- there was this big change made by the War Ministry of Bavaria. My understanding was that it eliminated vines and shrunk the Wappen to a standard 11 x 16 cm. the larger ones had been 13 x 18 cm. I for one cannot wait for you get home to measure those two examples you posted. The distance to the shield is visually very obvious. Is this a function of manufacture? Is this a function of two different sized Wappen's?

All is fine and dandy except some references seem to indicate that vines indicated mounted troops until the start of the war. The wear out date of the old Wappen was supposed to be 1916. But for steel gray Wappen?

In the old Kaiserzeit magazine volume IX
1980 number one pages five and six, Lecter Orrick clearly annotates a documented example of an M15 Wappen with vines. Of course that was over 25 years ago, there is no source nor any picture. So I eagerly look forward to your measurement and will look at a bunch of more picture books.

But I love learning in this forum!

 

[Tony without Kaiser]

I for one cannot wait for you get home to measure those two examples you posted. The distance to the shield is visually very obvious. Is this a function of manufacture? Is this a function of two different sized Wappen's?

Sheesh. No pressure huh? All M1886 Bayern foot-troops Wappens, and the M1915 steel foot-troops Wappens are the same small size. From the outside edge of the lion's tails, it is 112mm.

I always lay a piece of masking tape on Wappen to measure, as this way it negates the curve.

The Model 1914 brass and the Model 1915 Mounted-Troops Wappens I have (no vines) are all are identical. They measure 142mm from tail tip to tail tip.

In my opinion and experience, this is absolutely not a manufacturing variation. Mounted troops (cavalry, Artillery etc) have very different Wappens, in both shape and size as you can see from the photos above.

 

[joerookery]

I didn't mean to put any pressure on anybody I just find this quite exciting. So excuse my exuberance (poorly phrased requests). I cannot seem to find any pictures of vines. It also seems as though the mounted troops helmet was supposed to be 145 mm according to Seibold page 82. Foot troops seems to be a bit more confusing. If I read references right I should be looking for something that's about 160 mm in width. Everyone seems to have ones that are much much smaller. Minnesota Slim sent three measurements:

1) Artillery Measures 110mm wide and 86mm tall

2) Infantry 1 measures 107mm wide and 78mm tall

3) infantry 2 measures 106mm wide and 84mm tall

All of which agree with Tony's measurement given manufactures differences and measurement differences by chance. (Tony has detailed a measuring methodology in the thread on little ones and big ones. Sounds pretty useful to me.)

So how many standard sizes were there? Where did Seibold get his 11 x 16 measurement? Where did Orrick get his M15 vine from?

As a minor giggle, Seibold has wonderful drawings with measurements but he does not provide any measurement of the Wappen drawings.

 

[poniatowski]

I had to dig this thread back up....

So, if I'm reading this thread right, this helmet:

Could have been manufactured until 1914 and used well after, since it is the officer version with the larger wappen and has the vines under the coat of arms and lions.

Am I getting this right?

Ron

 

[-dick rowback]

Joe; Did'nt we discuss this at the SOS? I have 4 Bavarian artillery helmets [2 foot-2 field] my question was why are the "ovals with the coat of arms" all different sizes??? Different manufacturers or?? I think the overall measurements are about the same as everyone else has recorded for vines and without vines!. Dick

 

[joerookery]

So how many standard sizes were there? Where did Seibold get his 11 x 16 measurement? Where did Orrick get his M15 vine from?

I have never been able to answer this. It brings up all sorts of questions in my mind about probe models and the war Minister of Bavaria. I don't know. It is not addressed in the book and while Ron gets the basic concept the entire size thing could be a study of its own! Always listening to more input.